Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Sender: Arvind Sankar <niveditas98@gmail.com>
From:   Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:24:25 -0400
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        kernel-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/29] arm64/build: Assert for unwanted sections
Message-ID: <20201027212425.GD1833548@rani.riverdale.lan>
References: <CAMuHMdUJFEt3LxWHk73AsLDGhjzBvJGAML76UAxeGzb4zOf96w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMj1kXHXk3BX6mz6X_03sj_pSLj9Ck-=1S57tV3__N9JQOcDEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdV4jKccjKkoj38EFC-5yN99pBvthFyrX81EG4GpassZwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOdkq3ZwW+FEui1Wtj_dWBevi0Mrt4fHa4oiMZTUZKOMi3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdUDOzJbzf=0jom9dnSzkC+dkMdkyY_BOBMAivbJfF+Gmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOdkE=ViGOhvoBRcV=9anjowC_vb4Vtefp9010+sC4c_+Sw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMj1kXEhcQ_ngNVWddV76NqEz6d0tDhfStYGd5diydefzVLvdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOd=8YO3Vm0DuaWpDigMiwni+fVdrpagZtsROGziinjLvig@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201027203001.GA1833548@rani.riverdale.lan>
 <CAKwvOdmrjeLpS8H_uf_cfbOYFvE-ZhOdJQ14o4VoNF8ugARA0Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdmrjeLpS8H_uf_cfbOYFvE-ZhOdJQ14o4VoNF8ugARA0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 01:40:43PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 1:30 PM Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 01:17:55PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > > >  (I feel the same about there
> > > > > being an empty asm(); statement in the definition of asm_volatile_goto
> > > > > for compiler-gcc.h).  Might be time to "fix the compiler."
> > > > >
> > > > > (It sounds like Arvind is both in agreement with my sentiment, and has
> > > > > the root cause).
> > > > >
> > Btw, the bug mentioned in asm_volatile_goto seems like its been fixed in
> > 4.9, so the hack could be dropped now?
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180907222109.163802-1-ndesaulniers@google.com/
> 
> For the life of me I can't find Linus' response.  Maybe he shot it
> down in the PR, but I can't find it...Miguel do you recall?  I could
> paraphrase, but might be better to not rely on my memory.
> -- 
> Thanks,
> ~Nick Desaulniers

You couldn't find it in July either :)
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/7/10/1026

Possibly he didn't like the version check? That should be unnecessary now.